Wazzup Pilipinas!?
The world imagines climate negotiations as historic turning points—solemn halls where nations set aside differences to secure humanity’s future. The press releases call them “groundbreaking,” the headlines brand them “historic,” and leaders proudly proclaim progress. Yet those who have walked the corridors of COP summits know another reality: the decisions are often made not in the plenary halls, but in whispered conversations between superpowers in shadowed corners.
This was the insider’s perspective offered by our speaker, seasoned negotiator, prolific writer, and podcaster—who has stood at the frontline of international climate diplomacy. Speaking with disarming candor, he peeled back the layers of rhetoric and revealed what really happens when the world gathers to confront the climate crisis.
The Real Power Brokers
“When you walk into a negotiation room, the so-called big countries—the United States, the European Union, China—carry the weight,” he said. “You could see it at COP28. Until John Kerry and his Chinese counterpart reached an understanding, nothing moved.”
Behind the pomp of multilateralism, bilateral deals between superpowers often dictate the course of negotiations. Smaller nations, whether Malaysia, island states, or members of ASEAN, must fight for space, often resorting to alliances within blocs like the G77+China or the African Union. But even within these blocs, unity is fragile.
“The G77 is unwieldy,” the speaker explained. “It contains Singapore, Qatar, Zimbabwe, Pakistan—countries with vastly different needs. For Malaysia, a high middle-income country on the cusp of becoming developed, finding a place in this mosaic is a constant struggle.”
The Devil in the Details
If power dynamics shape the outcome, language shapes perception. Ministers and negotiators become masters of spin, capable of turning modest pledges into grand visions.
“Developed countries commit billions in climate finance,” the speaker said, “but buried in the fine print are loans disguised as aid, private sector contributions counted as public commitments, and conditions so strict that delivery falls far short of the headline numbers. Governments highlight the big numbers. The hidden footnotes tell a very different story.”
Malaysia itself has faced criticism. While its climate targets have been portrayed as “ambitious and forward-looking,” skeptics point out that measuring emissions reductions against GDP intensity allows absolute emissions to rise.
Yet the speaker defended the balancing act: “We cannot water down ambition. But history matters. Rich countries have cut their forests, burned fossil fuels, and reached high living standards. Now they expect us to leapfrog, without acknowledging the historic debt they owe us.”
Language of Hope Versus Language of Reality
To the public, ministers must project optimism. To negotiators, realism rules.
“As leaders, we can’t only paint doom and gloom,” the speaker admitted. “If people believe it’s too late, they disengage. But privately, we know we are dealing with stingy uncles—the developed countries—who are quick to fund wars but slow to pay for climate.”
This duality, he argued, makes journalists crucial. “Official statements rarely capture the compromises, the backroom battles, or the influence of fossil fuel lobbyists. Journalists must cultivate sources, cross-check notes, and tell the story behind the press release.”
Brazil, Biodiversity, and the Coming Battles
Looking ahead to COP30 in Brazil, Sidney predicted fierce debates—not just over fossil fuels, but also over biodiversity.
“Brazil is trying to weave nature and biodiversity into climate negotiations,” he noted. “For too long, these issues grew apart. But forests and climate are inseparable. The real test will be whether Brazil can reconcile its own fossil fuel industry with its vision for global leadership.”
The fault lines remain familiar: developed versus developing nations, ambition versus economic survival, rhetoric versus reality.
The Fossil Fuel Dilemma in Asia
Malaysia’s own climate dilemma mirrors that of its Asian neighbors. Oil and gas contribute 20–30% of government revenue, making it politically perilous to commit to rapid phase-outs.
“PETRONAS is sophisticated, but plastics showed me how deeply the oil cartel dominates,” Sidney said. “The EU and African countries wanted strong commitments in the plastics treaty. Norway—also an oil country—took a more progressive position. I argued that Malaysia should align with Norway. But we defaulted to the oil bloc instead.”
Part of the problem, he admitted, is the negotiators themselves. “In climate talks, we’ve built expertise. In plastics or biodiversity, we send officials without experience, who fall back on industrial talking points. The fossil fuel lobby arrives well-armed. Civil society, too often, is excluded.”
Exposing Hypocrisy, Elevating the South
The speaker reserved some of his sharpest words for Western hypocrisy. He cited EU rules that define deforestation narrowly—penalizing palm oil while ignoring urban sprawl. He pointed to the United States, the world’s largest historical polluter, which has wavered between joining and abandoning climate accords.
“This is a golden opportunity for the Global South,” he urged. “We must rise, not to defend palm oil or fossil fuels, but to demand planetary justice. The West has lost legitimacy. They speak of democracy, yet turn a blind eye to Gaza. They preach climate action, yet spend trillions on war.”
For Asia’s journalists, his call was clear: “Challenge the narratives. Expose the double standards. Educate the public. Because politicians will always chase votes, even if it means sacrificing the planet. The media must hold us to account.”
The Final Word
What emerges from the speaker’s testimony is not despair but a sober reminder: climate diplomacy is neither pure nor perfect. It is messy, political, compromised, and shaped by forces far beyond the headlines. Yet it remains humanity’s best chance.
Negotiations may be dominated by superpowers, diluted by fine print, and swayed by fossil fuel lobbies, but the voices of the South—and the journalists who amplify them—can tilt the balance.
Because at the end of the day, what happens in those corridors will determine not just the legacy of ministers and negotiators, but the survival of the generations to come.
Ross is known as the Pambansang Blogger ng Pilipinas - An Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Professional by profession and a Social Media Evangelist by heart.
.jpg)
